Table 2.
SYRCLE's risk of bias analysis.
| Item | Memis et al. 2008 [28] |
Vachharajani et al. 2010 [31] |
Xiao et al. 2012 [27] |
Savcun et al. 2013 [29] |
Xu et al. 2013 [24] |
Yang et al. 2013 [25] |
Zhao et al. 2016 [22] |
Zhong et al. 2016 [23] |
Kumari et al. 2017 [30] |
Liu et al. 2017 [26] |
Maa et al. 2017 [20] |
Chen et al. 2018 [21] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Was the allocation sequence adequately generated and applied? | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U |
| 2. Were the groups similar at baseline or were they adjusted for confounders in the analysis? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| 3. Was the allocation adequately concealed? | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U |
| 4. Were the animals randomly housed during the experiment? | Y | U | Y | Y | Y | U | Y | Y | Y | U | Y | Y |
| 5. Were the caregivers and/or investigators blinded from knowledge which intervention each animal received during the experiment? | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U |
| 6. Were animals selected at random for outcome assessment? | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U |
| 7. Was the outcome assessor blinded? | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U |
| 8. Were incomplete outcome data adequately addressed? | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U |
| 9. Are reports of the study free of selective outcome reporting? | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U |
| 10. Was the study apparently free of other problems that could result in high risk of bias? | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U | U |
Y: yes; N: no; U: unclear.